Q: What action should I take for my paper if the result changes due to a change in the method of analysis?

It’s interesting that you chose to go back to a published paper. Perhaps you spotted an error or discrepancy later and felt you needed to change the method of analysis. Looking at the larger picture, perhaps you wished to exercise integrity with regard to your research. These are great intentions.

The situation though is unfortunate as this is a published paper, and therefore, has certain implications. We shall not dwell further on the reasons for looking at a different method. However, we would urge you to ensure that the method you are exploring now is indeed a right method, because, if not, further changes would make the situation more complex.

Coming to your query, the article you are referring to is perhaps this one: What authors need to know about errata, expressions of concern, and retractions

If so, you would already be familiar with the differences between the various ways to deal with changes or errors in a published paper. Additionally, a letter to the editor (also explained in the same piece) is another way to deal with such a situation.

However, there are subtle differences among the various alternatives, which we will explain in relation to your context.

• An erratum (sometimes also known as a corrigendum) is typically for smaller changes or errors usually noticed by the author(s) and not affecting the conclusion. In your case, the change is not minor (as it’s a change in method). Also, it does impact the result, and therefore, the conclusion. So, as you have rightly deduced, an erratum may not be a fit here.
• An expression of concern is more for changes that are ongoing. It’s also a midway path between an erratum (which is not a grave change) and a retraction (which is for serious issues). So, if you are still in the midst of your revised analysis, this seems to be a better fit.
• A retraction is a withdrawal of a paper by the journal or publisher usually based on observations and comments by other researchers or informed lay people on the scientific value or validity of the paper. The lapse may have come from genuine oversight on the part of the author(s), but it usually doesn’t reflect well on their scientific capability and integrity (and often, also impacts their academic credentials). In short, a retraction is a serious situation for a paper and for the author(s). Based on your situation (though of course, without knowing all aspects), we believe a retraction may not be a fair outcome here.

Having said that, while none of these is desirable, your decision and action reflect great earnestness and integrity, and are therefore commendable, as you can also read in this similar query: Is it possible to remove an entire experiment from my published article through erratum?

What you should do is have a detailed consultation with the editor, as you seem to be doing. From the little you have shared about them, the editor seems to want to work toward a fair decision. In most cases, editors do aim to do the “right and fair thing.”

Do feel free to share with us later the outcome of this situation. For now, though, all the best for a speedy and fair resolution!